Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

P.R. Rajeev Vs Vacco V.A. — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2021)

Home
Kerala HC
2021
P.R. Rajeev Vs Vacco V.A.P.R. Rajeev v. Vacco V.A.

Dismissed

P.R. Rajeev v. Vacco V.A.

Kerala HC28 Sept 2021OP(C)/1892/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

O.P. filed in execution proceedings dismissed as infructuous since delivery of possession was already effected and execution petition closed.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

TUESDAY, THE 28^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 6TH ASWINA, 1943

OP(C) NO. 1892 OF 2018

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23-07-2018 IN E.A NO.331 OF 2018 AND E.A NO.332 OF 2018 IN E.P NO.39 OF 2018 IN OS 469/2016 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM.

PETITIONER/DEFENDAT/JUDGMENT DEBTOR :

P.R. RAJEEV, AGED YEARS, S/O. RATHNAM, ASWATHY JEWELLERY WORKS, VISHNUPURAM, CHERANELLOR, ERNAKULAM.

BY ADVS. SRI.SREEJITH S.NAIR SRI.BIJU KURIAKOSE VALLAPPILLY

RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF/DECREE HOLDER :

VACCO V.A. AGED 72 YEARS, S/O. ANTONY,VISHNUPURAM, CHERANELLOR, ERNAKULAM.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
P.R. Rajeev
respondent
Vacco V.A.

Coram

AI extract

A. Badharudeen

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Kerala HC
Decided on: 28 Sept 2021 · September
Registered: 26 Jul 2018
Case no.: OP(C)/1892/2018

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from A. Badharudeen

V.K. Prasad Vs Secretary, Cherthala Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.
24 Sept 2021
Indus Towers Limited Vs Parukutty
24 Sept 2021
Bethel Brethern Church Vs v D James
24 Sept 2021
Dr.Dileep Kumar P.P Vs Mary Paulose
28 Sept 2021

Cite this judgement

P.R. Rajeev v. Vacco V.A., OP(C)/1892/2018 (KL), decided on 28 September 2021.

The High Court of Kerala publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

A. Badharudeen

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Dismissed

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order in Original Petition in Execution Proceedings. Held: Since delivery of possession was already effected and the execution petition was closed, the Original Petition has become infructuous; no further proceedings are mandated; O.P. dismissed.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

BY ADVS. SRI.HARISH R. MENON SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O.P(Civil) No.1892 of 2018 2

A.BADHARUDEEN, J.

O.P(Civil) No.1892 of 2018

Dated this the 28^th day of September, 2021

J U D G M E N T

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent Sri.Prasanth.A.G, who represented the sole respondent in this O.P that the delivery has already effected and the execution petition was closed. Therefore, the matter has become infructuous.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time. It is reported by the Munsiff, Ernakulam that E.P No.39 of 2018 was closed on 27-07-2019 and delivery already effected. Going by the nature of challenge in this O.P, it appears that delivery by deputing an Ameen with permission to break open the decree schedule building and rendering police assistance, are the matters in dispute. Since delivery already effected, the matter has become infructuous and no further proceedings is mandated in this O.P. Hence, this petition is dismissed as infructuous.

A. BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE

amk

O.P(Civil) No.1892 of 2018 3

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1892/2018

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION EP NO. 39 OF 2018 FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE E.A 333 OF 2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN PRAYING FOR A REASONABLE TIME TO SURRENDER THE VACANT POSSESSION OF THE PLAINT SCHEDULE PROPERTY EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23-07-2018 IN E.A 331 OF 2018 AND EA 332 OF 2018 OF THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM.

CNR

KLHC010247502018

Topic

Execution and Attachment

Bench

Disposal

DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

Sobhana Vs Thankamony

28 Sept 2021

Nalakath Majeed Vs Ali

28 Sept 2021